Vermont has passed a law that allows the state attorney general to fine pregnancy care centers up to $10,000.00 for “advertising” the AG deems misleading. That’s the intent. Pro-Abortion Democrats passed a muzzle bill in 2023 to intimidate pregnancy care centers to the benefit of abortion clinics, but it didn’t work. Not exactly. It was immediately challenged for violating the First Amendment, viewpoint discrimination, etc., and is tied up in the courts.
The new law, S.28, “access to certain legally protected health care services,” was just signed into law by (r) Republican Governor Phil Scott. While its language and intent are equally partisan and likely also unconstitutional, the goal was to broaden the language so it looks less like a targeted attack by Abortion lobby hacks.
It fails, and I’d expect another lawsuit soon if one hasn’t already been prepared.
S.28 more broadly defines who may face Attorney General sanctions for misleading advertising. The “advertising, including advertising about health care services” clause has other health care providers – such as doctors opposed to vaccination mandates – concerned they, too, could run afoul of the AG. At present, the state’s Medical Practice Board is the go-to overseer of complaints against the medical providers.
Vaccines are (I believe) a new addition, and yes, why not include doctors who might have opinions about them that differ from the Attorney General? That’s a nice touch. But no one is coming between your doctor, women, and their health care professionals. Except they are – preemptively. The 10K fine is a threat that could violate not just the US Constitution but Vermont’s State Constitution.
The rising body of medical research on mRNA injections, for example, suggests they can and do (the COVID jab did) put pregnant mothers at risk of reproductive harm, including miscarriage or early infant death. S.28 would make it illegal, at the AG’s discretion, to promote those research results to protect women’s reproductive freedom, which is enshrined in the State Constitution.
This trap likewise applies to the moving target of potential fines aimed at pregnancy care centers. By arbitrarily muzzling speech based on the AG’s opinion, the State sets itself up for another lawsuit. It also inadvertently puts the rest of the health care system at risk.
Can abortion clinics continue to lie about the safety of the abortion pill or any other services they might promote, like hormone blockers? That’s up to the AG.
Will S.28 impose fines on doctors and hospitals, given how badly the medical industrial establishment mishandled the COVID-19 response messaging?
Not much was true, so can we expect the AG to block children’s scheduled COVID shots when we know they are an unnecessary risk peddled as safe and effective?
What about pregnant women? The COVID shots are still out there, and they have reproductive rights enshrined in the State Constitution.
Are the fines limited to providers, or can politicians or public figures who make false or misleading statements be on the hook? Or is that protected speech?
No clue, but this is clear. This is not a consumer protection bill. It is clumsy partisan targeting that silences speech aimed at alternatives to abortion while attempting to protect abortion, and I’m not surprised Vermont made it into law.
One more point. Despite this hostile legislative environment, Vermont now has ten pregnancy care centers and only five surgical abortion clinics, one of which is closing soon.
